At 07:12 AM 5/17/2007, strk wrote:
Which normative document says that a query string makes it *not* an abs_path ?
I'd think both the following are abs_path:
/file
/file?v=1
Yeah, I thought both of them would product abs_path when I started. Then I
dug into the grammar definition.
The magic line is in RFC 2616, Section 5.1.2
Request-URI = "*" | absoluteURI | abs_path | authority
The definition of abs_path and authority are in RFC 2396.
abs_path = "/" path_segments
authority = server | reg_name
Neither of these admits "?". So for your example "/file" is indeed
abs_path, but "/file?v=1" is not, because abs_path cannot contain
"?". Hey, it's not my rule.
As far as I'm concerned, this is a defect in the specification.
And now, a rant. You'd think that after twenty years of writing standards
documents with BNF and ABNF and the like that there would be software that
would (1) check a grammar for consistency, (2) check a grammar for
completeness and (3) compile into a recognizer that could be used to verify
test vectors. And much less standard conformance suites. A standard
that's not operational in these ways is far weaker than one that's just on
paper. Formal grammars are hard enough to understand without assistance.
Eric
_______________________________________________
Gnash-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
